* [PATCH] xfstests: 311: fsck the dmflakey device instead of the real device V2
@ 2013-05-15 15:20 Josef Bacik
2013-05-15 21:32 ` Dave Chinner
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Josef Bacik @ 2013-05-15 15:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xfs
Dave pointed out that xfs was having issues with 311 because of caching issues.
He suggested that I fsck the dm-flakey device to make sure we don't have this
problem. Make _check_scratch_fs take an optional argument to use as the device
to fsck. Thanks,
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
---
V1->V2: make _check_scratch_fs() take the optional argument of the device to
check
common/rc | 11 +++++++----
tests/generic/311 | 2 +-
2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/common/rc b/common/rc
index 7adf8b8..fe6bbfc 100644
--- a/common/rc
+++ b/common/rc
@@ -1678,6 +1678,9 @@ _check_test_fs()
_check_scratch_fs()
{
+ device=$SCRATCH_DEV
+ [ $# -eq 1 ] && device=$1
+
case $FSTYP in
xfs)
SCRATCH_LOG="none"
@@ -1688,19 +1691,19 @@ _check_scratch_fs()
[ "$USE_EXTERNAL" = yes -a ! -z "$SCRATCH_RTDEV" ] && \
SCRATCH_RT="$SCRATCH_RTDEV"
- _check_xfs_filesystem $SCRATCH_DEV $SCRATCH_LOG $SCRATCH_RT
+ _check_xfs_filesystem $device $SCRATCH_LOG $SCRATCH_RT
;;
udf)
- _check_udf_filesystem $SCRATCH_DEV $udf_fsize
+ _check_udf_filesystem $device $udf_fsize
;;
nfs*)
# Don't know how to check an NFS filesystem, yet.
;;
btrfs)
- _check_btrfs_filesystem $SCRATCH_DEV
+ _check_btrfs_filesystem $device
;;
*)
- _check_generic_filesystem $SCRATCH_DEV
+ _check_generic_filesystem $device
;;
esac
}
diff --git a/tests/generic/311 b/tests/generic/311
index 2b3b569..675d927 100644
--- a/tests/generic/311
+++ b/tests/generic/311
@@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ _run_test()
#Unmount and fsck to make sure we got a valid fs after replay
_unmount_flakey
- _check_scratch_fs
+ _check_scratch_fs $FLAKEY_DEV
[ $? -ne 0 ] && _fatal "fsck failed"
_mount_flakey
--
1.7.7.6
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] xfstests: 311: fsck the dmflakey device instead of the real device V2
2013-05-15 15:20 [PATCH] xfstests: 311: fsck the dmflakey device instead of the real device V2 Josef Bacik
@ 2013-05-15 21:32 ` Dave Chinner
2013-05-16 14:04 ` Rich Johnston
2013-05-17 12:02 ` Rich Johnston
2 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Dave Chinner @ 2013-05-15 21:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Josef Bacik; +Cc: xfs
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 11:20:17AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> Dave pointed out that xfs was having issues with 311 because of caching issues.
> He suggested that I fsck the dm-flakey device to make sure we don't have this
> problem. Make _check_scratch_fs take an optional argument to use as the device
> to fsck. Thanks,
>
> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
> ---
> V1->V2: make _check_scratch_fs() take the optional argument of the device to
> check
Looks fine from here...
Acked-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] xfstests: 311: fsck the dmflakey device instead of the real device V2
2013-05-15 15:20 [PATCH] xfstests: 311: fsck the dmflakey device instead of the real device V2 Josef Bacik
2013-05-15 21:32 ` Dave Chinner
@ 2013-05-16 14:04 ` Rich Johnston
2013-05-16 20:30 ` Josef Bacik
2013-05-17 12:02 ` Rich Johnston
2 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Rich Johnston @ 2013-05-16 14:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Josef Bacik; +Cc: xfs
On 05/15/2013 10:20 AM, Josef Bacik wrote:
> Dave pointed out that xfs was having issues with 311 because of caching issues.
> He suggested that I fsck the dm-flakey device to make sure we don't have this
> problem. Make _check_scratch_fs take an optional argument to use as the device
> to fsck. Thanks,
>
> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
> ---
Hi Josef,
Looks like it fails test 19 , are we supposed to see failures for ext4
and xfs?
./check generic/311
FSTYP -- xfs (non-debug)
PLATFORM -- Linux/x86_64 cxfsxe4 3.9.0+
MKFS_OPTIONS -- -f -bsize=4096 /dev/sdk2
MOUNT_OPTIONS -- /dev/sdk2 /mnt/scratch
generic/311 - output mismatch (see
/usr/src/xfstests/results/generic/311.out.bad)
--- tests/generic/311.out 2013-05-08 09:30:37.000000000 -0500
+++ /usr/src/xfstests/results/generic/311.out.bad 2013-05-16
08:13:00.000000000 -0500
@@ -293,16 +293,16 @@
26b2ad08ac2589804a15ceb473f0b1ac
Running test 19 direct, normal suspend
Random seed is 19
-26b2ad08ac2589804a15ceb473f0b1ac
-26b2ad08ac2589804a15ceb473f0b1ac
+d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
+d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
...
(Run 'diff -u tests/generic/311.out
/usr/src/xfstests/results/generic/311.out.bad' to see the entire diff)
Ran: generic/311
Failures: generic/311
Failed 1 of 1 tests
./check generic/311
FSTYP -- ext4
PLATFORM -- Linux/x86_64 cxfsxe4 3.9.0+
MKFS_OPTIONS -- /dev/sdk2
MOUNT_OPTIONS -- -o acl,user_xattr /dev/sdk2 /mnt/scratch
generic/311 - output mismatch (see
/usr/src/xfstests/results/generic/311.out.bad)
--- tests/generic/311.out 2013-05-08 09:30:37.000000000 -0500
+++ /usr/src/xfstests/results/generic/311.out.bad 2013-05-16
08:16:50.000000000 -0500
@@ -293,16 +293,16 @@
26b2ad08ac2589804a15ceb473f0b1ac
Running test 19 direct, normal suspend
Random seed is 19
-26b2ad08ac2589804a15ceb473f0b1ac
-26b2ad08ac2589804a15ceb473f0b1ac
+d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
+d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
...
(Run 'diff -u tests/generic/311.out
/usr/src/xfstests/results/generic/311.out.bad' to see the entire diff)
Ran: generic/311
Failures: generic/311
Failed 1 of 1 tests
It passes for btrfs.
./check generic/311
FSTYP -- btrfs
PLATFORM -- Linux/x86_64 cxfsxe4 3.9.0+
MKFS_OPTIONS -- /dev/sdk2
MOUNT_OPTIONS -- /dev/sdk2 /mnt/scratch
generic/311 46s
Ran: generic/311
Passed all 1 tests
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] xfstests: 311: fsck the dmflakey device instead of the real device V2
2013-05-16 14:04 ` Rich Johnston
@ 2013-05-16 20:30 ` Josef Bacik
2013-05-17 12:00 ` Rich Johnston
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Josef Bacik @ 2013-05-16 20:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rich Johnston; +Cc: Josef Bacik, xfs@oss.sgi.com
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 08:04:20AM -0600, Rich Johnston wrote:
> On 05/15/2013 10:20 AM, Josef Bacik wrote:
> > Dave pointed out that xfs was having issues with 311 because of caching issues.
> > He suggested that I fsck the dm-flakey device to make sure we don't have this
> > problem. Make _check_scratch_fs take an optional argument to use as the device
> > to fsck. Thanks,
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
> > ---
> Hi Josef,
>
> Looks like it fails test 19 , are we supposed to see failures for ext4
> and xfs?
>
Yeah that's what I was seeing, if you run the fsync tester without the reboot
option and look at the file itself it should match the md5sum thats in the good
output. Thanks,
Josef
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] xfstests: 311: fsck the dmflakey device instead of the real device V2
2013-05-16 20:30 ` Josef Bacik
@ 2013-05-17 12:00 ` Rich Johnston
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Rich Johnston @ 2013-05-17 12:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Josef Bacik; +Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
On 05/16/2013 03:30 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 08:04:20AM -0600, Rich Johnston wrote:
>> On 05/15/2013 10:20 AM, Josef Bacik wrote:
>>> Dave pointed out that xfs was having issues with 311 because of caching issues.
>>> He suggested that I fsck the dm-flakey device to make sure we don't have this
>>> problem. Make _check_scratch_fs take an optional argument to use as the device
>>> to fsck. Thanks,
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
>>> ---
>> Hi Josef,
>>
>> Looks like it fails test 19 , are we supposed to see failures for ext4
>> and xfs?
>>
>
> Yeah that's what I was seeing, if you run the fsync tester without the reboot
> option and look at the file itself it should match the md5sum thats in the good
> output. Thanks,
>
> Josef
>
Looks good.
Reviewed-by: Rich Johnston <rjohnston@sgi.com>
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] xfstests: 311: fsck the dmflakey device instead of the real device V2
2013-05-15 15:20 [PATCH] xfstests: 311: fsck the dmflakey device instead of the real device V2 Josef Bacik
2013-05-15 21:32 ` Dave Chinner
2013-05-16 14:04 ` Rich Johnston
@ 2013-05-17 12:02 ` Rich Johnston
2 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Rich Johnston @ 2013-05-17 12:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Josef Bacik; +Cc: xfs
On 05/15/2013 10:20 AM, Josef Bacik wrote:
> Dave pointed out that xfs was having issues with 311 because of caching issues.
> He suggested that I fsck the dm-flakey device to make sure we don't have this
> problem. Make _check_scratch_fs take an optional argument to use as the device
> to fsck. Thanks,
>
> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
This has been committed:
commit a8c25f0702254dfd504a6fa9c9db018729ebec53
Author: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
Date: Thu May 16 08:48:03 2013 -0500
xfstests: 311: fsck the dmflakey device instead of the real device
Thanks
--Rich
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-05-17 12:02 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-05-15 15:20 [PATCH] xfstests: 311: fsck the dmflakey device instead of the real device V2 Josef Bacik
2013-05-15 21:32 ` Dave Chinner
2013-05-16 14:04 ` Rich Johnston
2013-05-16 20:30 ` Josef Bacik
2013-05-17 12:00 ` Rich Johnston
2013-05-17 12:02 ` Rich Johnston
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox